Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010

From: K. Jones (shadetree1999_at_hotmailNODAMNSPAM.com)
Date: 09/25/04 

Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 17:35:19 -0400

"Tkalbfus1" <tkalbfus1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040925140511.11669.00001078@mb-m15.aol.com...
> >I do believe that if the end of cheap oil is inevitable, and the best
> >alternative is twice as expensive as oil is today - say nuclear power
> >plants.
>
> A nuclear power plant is twice as expensive because of safety
considerations.
> if the power plant was built where safety was not a consideration, say on
a
> remote Pacific Atoll, then safety would not be a consideration and the
only
> consideration would be the most economic way to produce power with a
nuclear
> power plant.

Holy sh*t! You're an "anti-nuke's" wet dream!!

>If the power plant is totally dedicated to producing hydrogen,
> then the hydrogen can be shipped to where its needed much like oil is
shipped
> today.

Pray tell, how do you "ship hydrogen" "much like oil is shipped today"?

>Alot of oil is drilled in remote places too. The Indian point power
> plant is a case in point of what not to do. the power plant is right in
the
> middle of a populated area where million would have to be evacuated if
> something were to go wrong. On a remote Pacific island, this is not the
case
> and a nuclear power plant can be built and operated cheaply. Nuclear
reactions
> are much more energetic than chemical ones, so if a nuclear power plant
can
> compete on an equal basis with a coal fired plant for instance, it would
be
> cheaper. That electricity in such a remote place would have nowhere to go
> except into the production of hydrogen, so what really the plant would
produce
> is hydrogen, it would be a nuclear powered hydrogen plant. the fact that a
lot
> of a little energy was wasted in the production of hydrogen would not
matter to
> the customers as the only form of energy that would be available to them
from
> this power plant would be in the form of hydrogen. Energy would be wasted,
but
> then alot of energy is wasted throughout the universe, and it bothers
hardly
> anyone that the Sun radiates most of its energy out into space.

So it's ok to waste a lot of energy to make hydrogen? For what purpose?

K. Jones

> Tom

Relevant Pages

  • Re: To whom "Romeo and Juliet" makes no sense?
    ... As long as there is such a thing as war, nations that wish to survive ... power plant by a nuclear power plant in 20 years. ... on how long it takes to build a nuclear power plant. ... prevent any and all future terrorist acts. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: OT: Spiked Article/Atheists and EcoChristians
    ... If a nuclear power plant explodes, ... very long-term bad stuff, and it will never go away (in our lifetime, ... Google for Wildlife near Chernobyl and you'll get a lot of hits. ... and you will find that a large coal fired power plant emits MORE ...
    (rec.arts.mystery)
  • Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010
    ... > A nuclear power plant is twice as expensive because of safety considerations. ... > then the hydrogen can be shipped to where its needed much like oil is shipped ... > of a little energy was wasted in the production of hydrogen would not matter to ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Transcript: President Ahmadinejad Delivers Remarks to the U.N.General Assembly
    ... I don't think anyone has any doubts about the Iranians' building the nuclear reactor for weapons development. ... building nuclear power plant given that "peak oil" ...
    (soc.culture.china)
  • Re: OT: Which is your favorite?
    ... We have not built a nuclear power plant in 30 years. ... As you can see, Big Oil is virtually ... non-existent in electricity generation. ...
    (comp.sys.hp.mpe)